Manjunath S/O Timanna Hiremani Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Manjunath S/O Timanna Hiremani Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal allowed; impugned order dated 25.03.2025 in Crl.Misc.No.118/2025 set aside; appellant-accused No.1 granted anticipatory bail in Crime No.36/2025 of Dharwad Vidyagiri Police Station subject to conditions: (a) voluntarily appear before the investigation officer within 15 days and execute personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum; (b) co-operate with the Police in investigation; (c) not hamper the investigation and not threaten the complainant and other prosecution witnesses.

Issue for consideration

Whether the offences under Section 3 of the SC and ST Act are attracted against the appellant-accused No.1, who belongs to Scheduled Caste. +1 more

Court's answer

As the appellant-accused No.1 belongs to Scheduled Caste, the offences under Section 3 of the SC and ST Act are not attracted against him.

Ratio / Principle

The complainant, though alleged to have sustained injuries, took treatment as an out-patient, which itself indicates that he has not sustained any grievous injury.

Key takeaways

The cases registered against the appellant earlier have been disposed of, wherein he has been acquitted.ratio¶38
The prosecution's apprehension that the appellant, if granted anticipatory bail, would hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution witnesses can be met by imposing stringent conditions.ratio¶38
The appellant has made out grounds for setting aside the impugned order and for grant of anticipatory bail.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — appeal under S.14A(2) of SC/ST Act allowed. Accused No.1, a Scheduled Caste agriculturist, sought anticipatory bail in Vidyagiri PS Crime No.36/2025 (ss.126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 352 r/w s.3(5) BNS and s.3(2)(5a) SC/ST (POA) Act) arising from the allegation that on 09.03.2025 near Barakotri he assaulted a lorry driver with a bracelet causing bleeding injuries; the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad had rejected the plea on 25.03.2025. Holding that offences under s.3 of the SC and ST Act are not attracted against a Scheduled Caste accused; that the complainant's out-patient treatment showed absence of grievous injury; that the accused's earlier cases ended in acquittal; and that the prosecution's apprehension of tampering could be met by imposing stringent conditions, the High Court set aside the impugned order and granted anticipatory bail on a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety, directing the accused to appear before the investigating officer within 15 days, co-operate with the investigation, and not threaten the complainant or other prosecution witnesses.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6834 CRL.A No. 100201 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100201 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

MANJUNATH S/O. TIMANNA HIREMANI, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: LAXMISINGANAKERI, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. GIRISH V. BHAT, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY VIDYAGIRI PS REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH – 580 011.

Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad

SHRIKANT S/O. MARUTI ASAMATTI, AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: GADIYAMMANA ONI, AMBLIKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD - 580 006.

(BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. HANUMESH M. DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

…RESPONDENTS

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14A(2) OF SC/ST ACT SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.03.2025 IN CRL. MISC NO.118/2025 PASSED BY II ADDL. DIST AND SESSION JUDGE, DHARWAD. ALLOW THE APPEAL AND ORDER TO RELEASE THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1 ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE IN VIDYAGIRI PS CRIME NO.36/2025 REGISTERED ON 10.03.2025 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 352 READ WITH SECTION 3(5) OF BNS AND SECTION 3(2)(5a) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6834 CRL.A No. 100201 of 2025

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant-accused No.1 praying to set-aside the order dated 25.03.2025 in Crl.Misc.No.118/2025 passed by II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, whereunder, anticipatory bail petition of the appellant-accused No.1 sought in respect of Vidyagiri Police station Crime No.36/2025 registered for offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 352 r/w Section 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(2)(5a) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as “the SC and ST Act” for short) came to be rejected.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-

accused No.1, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2.

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6834 CRL.A No. 100201 of 2025

The respondent No.2 has filed a complaint on 10.03.2025 stating that on 09.03.2025 at about 11.45 a.m., when he was driving his lorry towards Navalgund and when he was near Barakotri, this appellant-accused No.1, Sadhiq Dharwad-accused No.2 and two to three other unknown persons stopped his lorry, abused him in filthy words and told him to drive his lorry slowly and accused No.2 pulled him from the lorry and made him to fall. At that time, this appellant-accused No.1 assaulted him with bracelet on his hands and body and caused

bleeding injuries and other persons have made him to fall on the ground and kicked him and he went back to his house. Thereafter, this appellant-accused No.1 and two unknown persons went to his house and gave him threat of life if he files complaint and thereafter, he took treatment as out–door patient at Dharwad District Hospital. The said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.36/2025 of Vidyagiri P.S. for the aforesaid offences. The appellant-accused No.1 apprehending his

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6834 CRL.A No. 100201 of 2025

arrest, has filed anticipatory bail petition and the same came to be rejected by impugned order.

Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that incident has taken place on 09.03.2025 and complaint has been filed on 10.03.2025, there is a delay in filing the complaint. The appellant belongs to Scheduled caste and therefore, offences of the SC and ST Act are not attracted against him. The complainant has not sustained any grievous injury as alleged and as he has taken treatment as out-patient. In all the cases registered against the appellant, he has been acquitted and he has challenged opening of rowdy sheet against him in writ petition and it is pending. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal and grant anticipatory bail to the appellant-accused No.1.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that the appellant is having criminal antecedents and he was involved in 12 cases prior to the incident and rowdy sheet was opened against him. If he is granted

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6834 CRL.A No. 100201 of 2025

anticipatory bail, there are chances of hampering investigation and tampering prosecution witnesses. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 -State would contend that the appellant is having criminal antecedents and rowdy sheet has been opened against him. If the appellant is granted anticipatory bail, he will hamper the investigation and tamper the complainant and other prosecution witnesses. With this, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

Having heard the learned counsels, this Court has perused the impugned order and other materials placed on record.

As the appellant-accused No.1 belongs to Schedule caste, the offences under Section 3 of the SC and ST Act are not attracted against him. The complainant who alleged to have sustained injuries, has taken treatment as out-patient and that itself indicate that he

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6834 CRL.A No. 100201 of 2025

has not sustained any grievous injury. The appellantaccused No.1 has undertaken to co-operate with the Police in investigation. The cases registered against him earlier have been disposed off, wherein, he has been acquitted. The apprehension of the prosecution is that the appellant, if granted anticipatory bail, hamper the investigation and tamper the prosecution witnesses can be met with by imposing stringent conditions. The appellant has made out grounds for setting aside impugned order and grant of anticipatory bail.

9. In the result, the following

ORDER

i) The appeal is allowed.

ii) The impugned order dated 25.03.2025 passed

in Crl.Misc.No.118/2025 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad is set aside.

7 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6834 CRL.A No. 100201 of 2025

iii) The appellant–accused No.1 is granted anticipatory bail in Crime No.36/2025 of Dharwad Vidyagiri Police Station subject to the following conditions

a) The appellant–accused No.1 shall voluntarily appear before the investigation officer within 15 days from this day and execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the investigation officer.

b) The appellant–accused No.1 shall co-operate with the Police in investigation.

c) The appellant-accused No.1 shall not hamper the investigation and shall not

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6834 CRL.A No. 100201 of 2025

8 -

threaten the complainant and other

prosecution witnesses.

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

RKM CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28